The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1887-05-19
A Divided Diocese,

ing an organization, owing to the iact
that the clergy and thelaymen could moi
agree upon the roll Of members. Ihe
point of difference was the admission OF
the colored Rector of st. Marks Church,
Charleston, as one of the clerical dele
gates. The clergy holding that he was 9
member of the convention by virtue OF
his position as Rector of q church, IN
belonging to the Diocese, and the lay
delegates diBputing the proposition;
This year the same trouble confronted
the convention over the admission OF
Rev. j. III. M. Pollard, the colored rector
of st. Marks, whose name was placed
upon tho roll of clerical delegates by
the Bishop. After the trouble as TO
organization began, Mr.. Haskell moved
to strike the name of Mi. Pollard iron,
the roll. After some discussion, the vote
on this motion resulted as follows.
Clergy-Yeas 8, nays %.
Laymen-Yeas %, nays II.
OF, the clergymen, the Rev. Messrs.
Guerry, Hanckel and Trapier voted in
the affirmative. The majority of the lay
delegates who voted with the clergy was
increased this year to twelve against five
last wear. Those who so voted are Ex-
Governor John L. Manning and MessIs'
r. J. LaRoche, B. w. Shand, P. Z. Vii
lipigue, D. B. Egleston, E. H., Rucker.
F. 4. Mitchell, d. w. Frost. E. NJ. Sea-
brook, J. w. Meacher, j. Rutledge
Smith and J. r. London.
The amendment, NOT having received
9 majority of the votes of both orders,
was declared lost.
The question recurred npon Mr.. Sea-
brooks motion to accept the Bishops
roll. Col. McCrady moved to divide the
vote upon the roll, so as To seat :he dele
gates about whom there was no question,
which would organize the convention,
and then take up the question at issue.
He said We only ask that this body shall
be organized at once before going into
that other question.
The Bishop: "This body has been
declared duly organized"
Col. McCrsdy: "But there is differ.
ence of opinion on that subject. What
We want ia to seat those about whose
right to be seated there is no difference
of opinion. After having done this we
will'introduce resolutions referring this
matter to a commission"
DR.. Porter: Il appeal to the brethren
to shorten their speeches aud let uS come
to a VOTE"
Mr.. Shand, of Union, moved that the
debate be closed and a vote be taken"
Mr.. Edward McCrady, ST.: Before
the vote is taken just let me say few
words. The clergymen, it seems, are
forcing US to take somebody in that we
don't want"
The Bishop: "The clergymen think
you want to put some one out who is
already in and entitled to be in"
Mr.. McCrady: SWELL, that's the diff:
ference between us. The constitution as
it now stands is in our favor, for when i,
was framed the term clergyman meant
white man, and it can't mean BLACK
man now" !.
The Rev. Mr.. Mccullough: "If you
vote to take the name of this man from
the list you will be striking at the rig hts
of clerical order"
Mr.. Benet here interposed point oi
order which resulted in vote ON the
motion to divide the question, whic
resulted as follows:
Clerical-Yeas 5, nays 81.
Laymen-:Yeas 19, nays 8, divided 3.
So the motion to divide the question
not having received the majority of both
orders, was declared lost.
/ The question now required on the
original Seabrook motion to accept the
Bishops roll, and, 8 vote by orders being
demanded, resulted Gs follows:
Clerical-Yeas %, nays 8.
Laymen-Yeas 6, nays 18, divided 6
So this motion was also lost, and for 9
moment there was q pause as if the
dabatants were anxious for truce
The pause was broken by the Bishop
however, who arose and said "a major.
ity of the two orders having failed to
concur the motion is lost. The Chair il
happy to state, however, that the Con
yeDtion is duly organized and is ready
for any business that may come before
H." =
This announcement for moment
seemed to stagger the laymen, and q
clerical delegate bad already arisen and
obtained the floor and was about to make
q motion, when Mr.. Jervey arose and
fred this shot before the clerical delegate
could finish his motion: Il desire to
state,o, said he, "that the Parish of ST.
Michael's appeals from the decision oi
the Chair"
The Bishop, Quickly and decisively,);
"The Chair has made no decision. II
has only stated the canon which afirma
that the house is duly organized. Ifany
appeal is made, it must BIZ an appeal
from the constitution and canons, mol
from the Bishop, for he has made nc
decision"
Mr.. Jeryey "a delegate arose to make
q motion. / say he is out of order. He
says he is in order. Is not that decis
ion Z"
The Bishop: "Under the constitution
and canons, say he is in order"
Mr.. Jervey: "Well, appeal from that
ruling"
At this time dozen or more delegates
| were on their feet with points or order
motions, &c. One delegate wanted tc
know how the motion proposed by the
clerical delegate could be out of order
| when he had not made it.
MI. Jervey replied that his point oi
order was that the delegate was out Of
order, no matter what motion he made.
DR.. Porter: "Well if he can't make a
motion how can you make point OF
order9"
It was finally decided to hear the pro.
posed motion, and the Rev. Mr.. Joyner,
who had frat obtained the floor, said that
the motion he intended to propose was
that portion of the Bishops address be
referred TO special committee, to report
to the Convention at night session.
Mr.. Jervey:"I make the point of
order that the gentleman's motion is out
of order"
The Bishop: "On what grounds"
Mr.. Jeryey: "On the grounds that the
Convention is not organized"
The Bishops. "If the Convention is
not organised how can the appeal be con.
sidered7"
The discussion now took parlianen.
tary turn in which the question of organ.
-ization of parliamentary, de'iberative
and representative bodies was discussed
freely and at great length. Finally,
about half.past 2 O'CLOCK, the Bish.
op was about to put the question on
- Il Al